Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 93 views

    Heirs of Eugenio Lopez, Sr. vs. Enriquez

    Uploaded by

    Ellah Gaudicos
    1) The heirs of Eugenio Lopez, Sr. filed a motion in a land registration case claiming that the land subject to registration was previously sold to Eugenio Lopez, Sr. by the registration applicants. 2) The heirs of Lopez applied to annotate a notice of lis pendens on the title but the Register of Deeds and Land Registration Authority denied it. 3) The Court of Appeals and Supreme Court affirmed, finding that only a party to a case has legal standing to file a notice of lis pendens, and the heirs were merely movants in the land registration case, not original parties.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Heirs of Eugenio Lopez, Sr. vs. Enriquez

    Uploaded by

    Ellah Gaudicos
    93 views1 page
    1) The heirs of Eugenio Lopez, Sr. filed a motion in a land registration case claiming that the land subject to registration was previously sold to Eugenio Lopez, Sr. by the registration applicants. 2) The heirs of Lopez applied to annotate a notice of lis pendens on the title but the Register of Deeds and Land Registration Authority denied it. 3) The Court of Appeals and Supreme Court affirmed, finding that only a party to a case has legal standing to file a notice of lis pendens, and the heirs were merely movants in the land registration case, not original parties.

    Original Description:

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    1) The heirs of Eugenio Lopez, Sr. filed a motion in a land registration case claiming that the land subject to registration was previously sold to Eugenio Lopez, Sr. by the registration applicants. 2) The heirs of Lopez applied to annotate a notice of lis pendens on the title but the Register of Deeds and Land Registration Authority denied it. 3) The Court of Appeals and Supreme Court affirmed, finding that only a party to a case has legal standing to file a notice of lis pendens, and the heirs were merely movants in the land registration case, not original parties.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    93 views1 page

    Heirs of Eugenio Lopez, Sr. vs. Enriquez

    Uploaded by

    Ellah Gaudicos
    1) The heirs of Eugenio Lopez, Sr. filed a motion in a land registration case claiming that the land subject to registration was previously sold to Eugenio Lopez, Sr. by the registration applicants. 2) The heirs of Lopez applied to annotate a notice of lis pendens on the title but the Register of Deeds and Land Registration Authority denied it. 3) The Court of Appeals and Supreme Court affirmed, finding that only a party to a case has legal standing to file a notice of lis pendens, and the heirs were merely movants in the land registration case, not original parties.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 1

    Heirs of Eugenio Lopez, Sr. v.

    Enriquez
    G.R. No. 146262. January 21, 2005
    TOPIC: Notice of Lis Pendens
    PONENTE: Carpio, J.
    FACTS:
     Sandoval and Ozaeta filed an application for registration of title before the RTC of Pasig City. The land registration court
    granted the application.

     The Land Registration Authority issued the two Decrees in the names of Sandoval and Ozaeta both with their respective
    spouses.

     Petitioners, heirs of Eugenio Lopez, Sr., filed a motion alleging that Sandoval and Ozaeta sold the lots subject of the application
    to the late Eugenio Lopez, Sr. The heirs of Lopez prayed that the court consider in the land registration case the Deed of
    Absolute Sale over the lots executed by Sandoval and Ozaeta and their respective spouses in favor of Eugenio Lopez, Sr.
    Invoking Section 22 of PD 1529, heirs of Lopez also prayed that the court issue the decree of registration in their names as the
    successors-in-interest of Eugenio Lopez, Sr.

     18 August 1998: The Register of Deeds of Marikina City issued the corresponding Original Certificates of Title in favor of
    Sandoval and Ozaeta and their spouses.

     The heirs of Lopez filed another motion to declare void the Decrees and the OCTs. The heirs of Lopez pointed out that the
    OCTs show that incumbent Administrator Alfredo R. Enriquez signed the Decrees in 1997, before he assumed office in 1998.

     The heirs of Lopez questioned the inconsistencies in the dates and requested the LRA to recall the decrees. The LRA
    Administrator denied the request and explained that the inconsistency in the date was due to oversight and that the decrees
    were actually issued when the Administrator assumed office.

     The heirs of Lopez filed with the ROD of Marikina City an application to annotate the notice of lis pendens at the back of the
    OCTs on the ground that petitioners have filed with the land registration court a motion to declare such OCTs void.

     The ROD of Marikina City denied the application to annotate the notice of lis pendens.

     The heirs of Lopez elevated the denial in consulta to the LRA.

     The Ruling of the Land Registration Authority


    o The LRA agreed with the ROD that a notice of lis pendens based on a motion is not registrable. The LRA ruled that
    only a party to a case has the legal personality to file a notice of lis pendens relative to the pending case.
    o The LRA declared that the heirs of Lopez are not parties to the case. Since a land registration case is a proceeding in
    rem, an order of general default binds the whole world as a party in the case. The heirs of Lopez are mere movants
    whose personality the court has not admitted. The LRA ruled that the heirs of Lopez should have filed a motion to lift
    the order of general default.

     The Ruling of the Court of Appeals


    o The appellate court dismissed the petition for lack of merit and reiterated the LRAs ruling that only a party to a case
    has the legal personality to file a notice of lis pendens. The heirs of Lopez have no legal personality because they
    failed to file a motion to lift the order of general default in the land registration case.

    ISSUE(S): Whether a notice of lis pendens is registrable based on a motion to declare void the decrees and titles
    HELD: NO.
    RATIO:
     As decreed by Section 76 of PD 1529, a notice of lis pendens should contain a statement of the institution of an action or
    proceeding, the court where the same is pending, and the date of its institution. A notice of  lis pendens should also contain a
    reference to the number of the certificate of title of the land, an adequate description of the land affected and its registered
    owner.

     The ROD denied registration of the notice of lis pendens because the application was bereft of the original petition or complaint
    upon which this the Court will base its action.

     Both the LRA and the CA denied the application for a notice of lis pendens because the heirs of Lopez are mere movants, and
    not original parties. As they are not parties to an action as contemplated in Section 76 of PD 1529, they failed to present the
    requisite pleading to the ROD. The Court held that the ROD correctly denied the application for a notice of lis pendens.

    You might also like